If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: Is fire and fee a minimal pair?

Originally Posted by 5jj

No. Fee can be half of a minimal pair only if the other half also contains a monophthong.

I understood that a word that contains a monophthong can make a minimal pair with only a word that contains a monophthong.
And the same goes for words that contain diphthongs.
For example, bee and bay are not a minimal pair.
Am I correct?

Re: Is fire and fee a minimal pair?

Originally Posted by HifaMo

I understood that a word that contains a monophthong can make a minimal pair with only a word that contains a monophthong.
And the same goes for words that contain diphthongs.
For example, bee and bay are not a minimal pair.
Am I correct?

Re: Is fire and fee a minimal pair?

Originally Posted by 5jj

No. Fee can be half of a minimal pair only if the other half also contains a monophthong.

According to the above statement, two words are minimal pair if they contain the same type vowels.
So, /fɪə/ and /fiː/ are not minimal pair because one contains a monophthong the other a diphthong.
However, here is an example of a list that shows the opposite.Vowel contrast kick versus cake
Please, correct me.

Re: Is fire and fee a minimal pair?

Originally Posted by HifaMo

Please, correct me.

There is no need. I gave incorrect information in post #2. Sorry. I must have been half asleep.

Although the diphthongs are a glide from one vowel to a second, they are classed as phonemes in English (as are the consonants /ʧ/ and /ʤ/). Fie (/faɪ/) and fee (/fi:/) are therefore a minimal pair. However, fire and fee are not a minimal pair because, for most speakers, fire (/ˈfaɪə(r)/ has two syllables.

Re: Is fire and fee a minimal pair?

Originally Posted by 5jj

However, fire and fee are not a minimal pair because, for most speakers, fire (/ˈfaɪə(r)/ has two syllables.

Maybe in some North American accents, but certainly not in RP. It's /faɪ̯ə(r)/ not */ˈfaɪ̯.ə(r)/, that's why it's often smoothered to [fäə̯~fäː]. Were it disylabic, it wouldn't be so common - smoothering is rarer across syllable boundaries.

I temporarily don't have my LPD (my friend borrowed it), but Cambridge dictionary shows an one syllable pronunciation in both RP and GA. What's more, it doesn't show the primary accent sign, and it does so only when the word has... one syllable. Merriam-Webster also says this word has one syllable. So does the "Oxford Dictionaries" site. So I'm afraid you're wrong, at least about RP and GA.